"There's not one report coming from Benghazi about a protest around the embassy.... People in charge of security never reported a protest because there was not one...."

And John McCain, calling the NYT an "ever-reliable surrogate for the Obama administration," said:

"The false narrative that The New York Times has been trying to further is intended to undermine the conclusion that the Senate Intelligence Committee has effectively arrived at, that is, that the administration knew or should have known of the terrorist threat present in Benghazi during the relevant period and should have pre-positioned assets, or made other preparations, that would have prevented Americans there from being harmed or otherwise ensured their security."

42 comments:

That has been known for a very long time, especially in regards to political articles.

I wish Althouse would find other sources for her blog posts because I do believe that she misses a lot of information that the NYT just chooses not to report on. Are there no other sources that she could use for the basis of her blog posts or is it her 74% liberal bias coming out as who she chooses to post as the presenter of "FACTS" about an issue.

The Republicans are constantly blaming "the terrorists" and their "affiliates." If you're not in a state of constant unease over another act of terror, then you're naive or stupid or whatever. I'm glad the New York Times finally stood up to these obnoxious bigots. If these Senators believe the Times' reporters are lying, then they should prove it.

"The Republicans are constantly blaming "the terrorists" and their "affiliates." If you're not in a state of constant unease over another act of terror, then you're naive or stupid or whatever. I'm glad the New York Times finally stood up to these obnoxious bigots. If these Senators believe the Times' reporters are lying, then they should prove it."

Spiros Pappas (circa 1937) says: The Republicans are constantly blaming "the communists" and their "affiliates" for the mass starvation of kulaks. If you're not in a state of constant unease over another act of mass murder by the communists, then you're naive or stupid or whatever. I'm glad the New York Times and Walter Duranty finally stood up to these obnoxious bigots. If these Senators believe the Times' reporters are lying, then they should prove it

Spiros: So if it wasn't terrorists and their affiliates who staged a deliberate assault on our compound, complete with indirect fires, killed an ambassador and several other Americans, just what the fuck was it? You think Ambassador Stevens lost a bar bet or something?

The Republicans are constantly blaming "the terrorists" and their "affiliates." If you're not in a state of constant unease over another act of terror, then you're naive or stupid or whatever. I'm glad the New York Times finally stood up to these obnoxious bigots. If these Senators believe the Times' reporters are lying, then they should prove it.

...except the CIA and military said it was a terrorist attack within minutes of it occurring.

Literally the ONLY people claiming it was a spontaneous protest and attack are Obama admin members.

Walter Duranty of the New York Times lied to cover Stalin's conduct of the Holodomor back in the 1930s. The NYT didn't fess up to the mis-reporting until 1986, more than 50 years later. What has really changed about their editorial policy since then?

I wish there was edit function. The senate benghazi report mentions the cairo protests were spilling over elsewhere and that intelligence (CIA) continued to believe for days that the video may have been the reason for the terror attack. They still believe it may have provided a spark for the terror attack, an attack that the president referred to as an act of terror immediately btw. The conservative nonsense defeats the very real failures of the state department to protect the annex, because it discredits them, and that is a shame because Clinton does have some failures on this issue and more importantly it clouds the ability to actually make changes to prevent future loss of life.

I'm reading the Dallek biography of Lyndon Johnson. They apparently all knew of his history of abusing subordinates and using crude language. They were tactful enough not to mention it until after the 64 election......The truly annoying thing about the press, and most especially The Times, is how they think their prejudices are lofty ideals.

You know why Very Smart people are smarter than you hoi barbaroi? Seems that they are NYT readers who, unlike mere mortals like us’n, can somehow always interpret what seems to be happening on the surface so that all will know the real underlying truth.

We were always at war with Eastasia.

On the sixth day of Hate Week, after the processions, the speeches, the shouting, the singing, the banners, the posters, the films, the waxworks, the rolling of drums and squealing of trumpets, the tramp of marching feet, the grinding of the caterpillars of tanks, the roar of massed planes, the booming of guns — after six days of this, when the great orgasm was quivering to its climax and the general hatred of Eurasia had boiled up into such delirium that if the crowd could have got their hands on the 2,000 Eurasian war-criminals who were to be publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would unquestionably have torn them to pieces — at just this moment it had been announced that Oceania was not after all at war with Eurasia. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Eurasia was an ally.

You know why Very Smart people are smarter than you hoi barbaroi? Seems that they are NYT readers who, unlike mere mortals like us’n, can somehow always interpret what seems to be happening on the surface so that all will know the real underlying truth.

We were always at war with Eastasia.

On the sixth day of Hate Week, after the processions, the speeches, the shouting, the singing, the banners, the posters, the films, the waxworks, the rolling of drums and squealing of trumpets, the tramp of marching feet, the grinding of the caterpillars of tanks, the roar of massed planes, the booming of guns — after six days of this, when the great orgasm was quivering to its climax and the general hatred of Eurasia had boiled up into such delirium that if the crowd could have got their hands on the 2,000 Eurasian war-criminals who were to be publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would unquestionably have torn them to pieces — at just this moment it had been announced that Oceania was not after all at war with Eurasia. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Eurasia was an ally.

Imagine if we could create a faction, who could control just one of the instruments but control it well. And if we could direct it at an internal entity, to divide us. Would not we want to control those two minutes? The two minutes every day that compel us towards that division? What if we made that two minutes more than two minutes? What if we could watch that hate twenty four hours a day, stewing with rage against ourselves.

Journalism isn't dead, it's just hibernating. It occassionally wakes up when there's a Republican scandal but otherwise it simply "reports" the DNC/White House press releases. When the next Republican is elected president, then journalism is fully awake. That's as good a reason as any to vote for Republicans - it forces the Press to do their jobs.

Spiels papas wrote:The Republicans are constantly blaming "the terrorists" and their "affiliates." If you're not in a state of constant unease over another act of terror, then you're naive or stupid or whatever. I'm glad the New York Times finally stood up to these obnoxious bigots. If these Senators believe the Times' reporters are lying, then they should prove it.

and yet our embassy was attacked? ON 9/11. BY TERRORISTS! Do you think maybe the reason our ambassador is dead, is because of people having attitudes like yourself?T. hats probably what happened. Ambassador Stephens asked for more security, and some liberal douche said "there is no terrorist threat". And then, oops. But "what does it matter?"

I know, I know, it is getting too transparent...I'm considering canceling my subscription to the NYT. When you scan other major papers, as I try to find time to do, the NYT pattern is too clear. The books they choose for review and promotion ... The stories they don't cover ... It is in so many ways a GREAT paper, probably I will keep reading it AND try to keep a balance in my daily reading, AND read with a critical mind. It's a lot of work, being an informed citizen! I'm not just reading whomever agrees with me. Time out to watch Poirot or Sherlock... or just watch the snow fall.